Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Trajectories #34

Open
davidwaroquiers opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Trajectories #34

davidwaroquiers opened this issue Jun 14, 2018 · 1 comment
Labels
event/workshop-2018 Issues discussed during OPTIMaDe workshop 2018 status/has-concrete-suggestion This issue has one or more concrete suggestions spelled out that can be brought up for consensus. topic/property-standardization The specification of the precise data representation of properties and entries

Comments

@davidwaroquiers
Copy link

davidwaroquiers commented Jun 14, 2018

Trajectories should be a simple extension of the structure API (see Issue #23)

Suggestion :

lattice_vectors_trajectory : list of each lattice_vectors-like (as defined in structure, see Issue #23) at each time step or relaxation step
cartesian_site_positions_trajectory : list of each cartesian_site_positions-like (as defined in structure) at each time step or relaxation step
For a trajectory/relaxation to be "activated", at least one of the previous field has to be defined.

For trajectories, the following (optional) fields can be given :
md_start_time : Starting time of the trajectory (suggested unit : fs)
md_time_step : Time step of the MD trajectory (if time step is constant), in suggested unit fs
md_times : If variable time steps are allowed, list of times of the MD trajectory, in suggested unit fs

We suggest that the rest of the structure field stays the same (dimension_types, species, ...). Assemblies could also be used for e.g. Path Integral Molecular Dynamics.

@davidwaroquiers davidwaroquiers added event/workshop-2018 Issues discussed during OPTIMaDe workshop 2018 topic/property-standardization The specification of the precise data representation of properties and entries labels Jun 14, 2018
@rartino
Copy link
Contributor

rartino commented Jun 14, 2018

So, I guess the suggestion is that the above defines a trajectory entry, i.e., the above + what is in structure, but with lattice_vectors replaced by lattice_vectors_trajectory and cartesian_site_positions replaced by cartesian_site_positions_trajectory?

(Or is the proposal that these can be added on top of a structure?)

It was brought up in the discussion that this may lead to single records that are too big to send over 'in one go'. My suggestion was, in such a situation, to rely on the mechanisms in http for partial transfers, e.g., https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/206

@rartino rartino added the status/has-concrete-suggestion This issue has one or more concrete suggestions spelled out that can be brought up for consensus. label Jun 14, 2018
@merkys merkys mentioned this issue Jun 1, 2022
@ml-evs ml-evs removed this from the v1.2 milestone Dec 5, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
event/workshop-2018 Issues discussed during OPTIMaDe workshop 2018 status/has-concrete-suggestion This issue has one or more concrete suggestions spelled out that can be brought up for consensus. topic/property-standardization The specification of the precise data representation of properties and entries
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants